/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6700706
>Being proven wrong is deprecated...
when I'm wrong I learn something, but then I'm not normal

>>6659138
>People usually believe whatever a talking head tells them.

this is an unfortunate truth anon

when two EEs and along with a PhD high energy physicist with experience in industry tell you something you might want to listen


many talking heads have denigrated Tesla's work for over 100 years now, and few have ever truly understood it. Tesla's claims and experiments have been deliberately maligned by people who believe the simplified formula they learned in school are the be-all and end-all of the subject, when they do not realize just how simplified the information they were taught is. have you ever actually looked at Oliver Heaviside's work? the math is incredibly complex because he accounts for all the variables. when most engineering and physics formulas have the caveat "under most circumstances this factor is negligible" or some such. the interactions of EM waves in a transmission line was all Heaviside set out to explain and it took several hundred pages of equations when everything is accounted for.

propagation modes in a waveguide have some VERY interesting characteristics.
people say Tesla's idea can't work because the waves attenuate with distance too quickly. in fact ordinary radio waves being transverse have a spherical wavefront and attenuate with the square of the distance traveled. However Tesla's system uses a longitudinal mode that has a linear wavefront that attenuates in direct proportion to the distance.

the qualities of the waveguide we live in are fairly well known to NASA and several published papers back up Tesla's claims about the characteristics of the waveguide and it's propagation modes
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20120000051.pdf

so b4 you go disbelieving a "talking head" find out what sources are used in the information

>>6592207
>What happens to the molten magnetic core below the earth as the humid sky above the earth takes up a charge of its own?

it has a charge, inductively created by the charge on the ionosphere.

I have long wondered what the mechanism is for charge separation that causes the ionosphere to ALWAYS have the same charge when the solar wind is mostly neutral.

>>6592207
>If you approach science and ideas with "you are idiot, me smarter than you", you will never learn anything of the Socratic Method.

some from column A and a little from column B
people who say things like>>6592195
>for we will no longer be a part of the fourth dimension, our magnetic poles will leave us and we will be a part of the fifth dimension. The first sun will leave, as all three other suns leave, and in darkness will come the fifth sun.

leave me little choice in my estimation of their overall intelligence

>>6579420
this board isn't "shit"
It isn't perfect, but what is?
I agree that there are abrasive personality types here, but without them... it just wouldn't be as much fun.
I find it interesting debating anons whose's major thrill in life is the claustrophobic rush from a hermetically sealed mind.

dubito ergo cogito ergo sum

this is the new age agora of socratic method, if you can hear above the babble and noise you might learn something